gumstix-users

This may be a linux newbie question rather than specifically linux on
gumstix newbie question, but you guys can probably help, so here goes:
I just built a toolchain for the gumstix: built minimal gcc-2.9.5,
then glibc-2.2.5, then full gcc-3.4.4.
Now I have all the gcc-3.4.4 compilers: arm-linux-gcc, arm-linux-g++,
arm-linux-gcj, etc.
I also have a bunch of libraries: libc.so, libc.a, libstdc++.so,
libstdc++.a, etc.
Now my questions:
1. The *.a libraries are just archives of the library functions for
static linking, right? As a result, those files only need to be on
the build system (i686) not on the target system (gumstix), right?
2. The shared libraries (*.so) need to be copied to the gumstix,
right? Is there an equivalent to stripping an executable for shared
libraries? I ask because the libc.so library is five megabytes in
size. The libc.so library on my i386-linux dist. is only 1.2
megabytes. Is the large size normal or is there some equivalent
procedure for reducing a libraries size?
3. Now that I have gcc-3.4.4, I should be able to build glibc-2.3.5.
Is there a good reason to do so, or is glibc-2.2.5 sufficient?
--dbernat32

On Oct 2, 2005, at 2:51 PM, David Bernat wrote:
> This may be a linux newbie question rather than specifically linux on
> gumstix newbie question, but you guys can probably help, so here goes:
>
> I just built a toolchain for the gumstix: built minimal gcc-2.9.5,
> then glibc-2.2.5, then full gcc-3.4.4.
> Now I have all the gcc-3.4.4 compilers: arm-linux-gcc, arm-linux-g++,
> arm-linux-gcj, etc.
> I also have a bunch of libraries: libc.so, libc.a, libstdc++.so,
> libstdc++.a, etc.
>
> Now my questions:
> 1. The *.a libraries are just archives of the library functions for
> static linking, right? As a result, those files only need to be on
> the build system (i686) not on the target system (gumstix), right?
Correct
> 2. The shared libraries (*.so) need to be copied to the gumstix,
> right? Is there an equivalent to stripping an executable for shared
> libraries? I ask because the libc.so library is five megabytes in
> size. The libc.so library on my i386-linux dist. is only 1.2
> megabytes. Is the large size normal or is there some equivalent
> procedure for reducing a libraries size?
Correct. Not sure why your gumstix libc.so is so large -- it'll
depend on the options you used to compile the library. My libc.so
for gumstix is about 272kB.
> 3. Now that I have gcc-3.4.4, I should be able to build glibc-2.3.5.
> Is there a good reason to do so, or is glibc-2.2.5 sufficient?
I think you probably haven't found the gumstix buildroot stuff, which
just deals with all this stuff like building a toolchain, C library,
etc for you. Check out:
http://www.gumstix.org/tikiwiki/tiki-index.php?page=programming
and the rest of the wiki.
C

Hi Craig/David,
> Correct. Not sure why your gumstix libc.so is so large -- it'll
> depend on the options you used to compile the library. My libc.so
> for gumstix is about 272kB.
The reason the library is so large is because David is using glibc and
buildroot uses uClibc.
--
Dave Hylands
Vancouver, BC, Canada
http://www.DaveHylands.com/

Community

Help

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

CountryState

JavaScript is required for this form.

I agree to receive quotes, newsletters and other information from sourceforge.net and its partners regarding IT services and products. I understand that I can withdraw my consent at any time. Please refer to our Privacy Policy or Contact Us for more details